It's pretty clear that Nvidia has a huge presence in the supercomputer and cloud markets, as their GPU + CPU designs provide ridiculous efficiency. They also already have partners in place every direction in the pipeline, so that's two key aspects right there that OnLive didn't have in the least. In fact the only thing they were missing was the hardware, which was best waited on until they could get it right - after watching the mistakes of others and gauging the market. Now they just need to get the rendering time down, keep it affordable, and work with telecomm.

That being said, I very much agree with what many people in this thread stated: that price is the real factor. If this game make gaming cheap enough, the reality is that it will take market share. It's no different than outsourcing or other cloud solutions in that respect: you save money, just at the consumer level. With the way the Wii U is going, with the way Valve's Big Screen and hardware project is going, with how the Ouya is going, with how the gaming market in general is going, you will simply need consolidation/simplicity in the living room; merely disliking that reality doesn't make it go away.

I actually think this is a big step any way you look at it. If it fails spectacularly, good; we won't have any more of it. If it succeeds, great, gaming made cheaper and more available. This is a big push from Nvidia, I don't think it's just "testing the waters"; they have a strong game plan (well, stronger than what others have had) and the resources to make it happen. I'm just curious what they expect from content creators and ISP's in terms of cooperation.

This comment was edited on Jan 7, 2013, 19:58.

Subject

OptionalMessage

Login

Email Password Remember Me

If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can
sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.